1) MSNBC -- hardly a conservative outlet -- reported that all the shooting had actually happened at a nearby Chase bank.
2) Planned Parenthood Rocky Mountains division put out a statement that they didn't think this had been targeted at them.
3) Planned Parenthood put out a statement a few hours after the shootings that said that none of their staff and also none of their patients had been among the victims.
4) The history of the guy suggested he was barely connected to the world we live in, occupying a cabin with no electricity nor plumbing. He also had a legal history that suggested both domestic violence and cruelty to animals.
So, now it sounded like a bank robbery gone wrong, with the hostage taking at the PP location just by coincidence.
Then, today, we get these anonymous quotes sourced to law enforcement officials:
In one statement, made after the suspect was taken in for questioning, Dear said "no more baby parts" in reference to Planned Parenthood, according to two law enforcement sources with knowledge of the case.So now, who knows? Maybe somehow it was intended as a terrorist act aimed at Planned Parenthood after all, and he was just spectacularly bad at it. He may be too disordered to have had a certain purpose.
But the sources stressed that Dear said many things to law enforcement and the extent to which the "baby parts" remark played into any decision to target the Planned Parenthood office was not yet clear. He also mentioned President Barack Obama in statements.
Those statements are proving politically very useful to those on the Left, for whom this is not an uncertain but a very certain opportunity. It's an opportunity to tell everyone on the Right to shut up once and for all about Planned Parenthood, and to make any rhetoric about abortion as the killing of babies off limits as hate speech that somehow causes irrational violent types to lash out.
Also, it's a chance to push for gun control, the President's new favorite topic. Funny how we didn't hear anything about Chicago in his speech, a city with the strictest gun control in the nation and also gun violence the likes of which most of the rest of the country never dreams. Or Paris, which has every kind of gun control a progressive heart could desire, and all the same far worse shootings occur.
The President is behind the ball on this one. Even INTERPOL has been suggesting, for a couple of years now, that an armed citizenry may be the only rational response to the threat of terrorism by active shooters. Harden the whole society, and such threats become much less dangerous in scope.
One solid thing can be said from my position: it sounds as if the police officer killed was a really decent guy. My sympathies go to his family and community.
UPDATE: Uncertainty abounds.
UPDATE: Someone thinks of citing the Catechism.
1756 It is therefore an error to judge the morality of human acts by considering only the intention that inspires them or the circumstances (environment, social pressure, duress or emergency, etc.) which supply their context. There are acts which, in and of themselves, independently of circumstances and intentions, are always gravely illicit by reason of their object; such as blasphemy and perjury, murder and adultery. One may not do evil so that good may result from it.It's one of the areas in which I am most inclined to sin, I must confess.
6 comments:
People better not have even thought about believing the Left's propaganda. For that won't be the last time they get conned.
Also, it's a chance to push for gun control, the President's new favorite topic.
Demoncrats have been in favor of gun control ever since John Brown scared the pants off the Jacksonian copy cats of plantation era. And well, slave rebellions too, might have caused some owners to rethink things.
People just want to think it is something new.
At this point in time, I am going with this:"He may be too disordered to have had a certain purpose."
As for gun control; I have no problem with the authorities enforcing the laws on the books. We all know that is not going to happen, because it is hard and would offend the base. It is much easier and less risky to harass the law abiding, while creating the illusion of accomplishment.
I say, let the games begin. The pro gun control base operates under the delusion that gun owners are conservative, or toothless, illiterate, bible thumping types, as opposed to people from all walks of life. I think the cynical pols know better.
As for gun control; I have no problem with the authorities enforcing the laws on the books.
Depends on whose books. I have a whole lot less trouble with Texas' gun laws than I do those of California or New York.
As for the Left's potential message, [i]t's an opportunity to tell everyone on the Right to shut up once and for all about Planned Parenthood, and to make any rhetoric about abortion as the killing of babies off limits as hate speech that somehow causes irrational violent types to lash out[,] making that case should be an opportunity to demonstrate with the Left's own words the foolishness and immorality of the Left on this matter.
And, to turn an argument of the Left regarding a different matter on its ear, if there were no abortions, there'd be no need to react violently toward abortionists. They bring the thing on themselves.
Eric Hines
Indeed, it is a weak argument because it assumes that we should know better than to put them at risk by accurately describing their activities. The argument boils down to "Explaining what Planned Parenthood frequently does is likely to lead people to shoot them, and you should take responsibility for your role in that violence."
The Left did say Geller deserved the requisite consequences of provoking violence. In that sense, Planned Profit's profit is provoking violence and bank robberies.
Post a Comment